Jagdish Prasad Dwivedi vs Chakradhar
2021 Latest Caselaw 8222 MP

                                                        1                                MP-3012-2020
                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                        MP No. 3012 of 2020
                                     (JAGDISH PRASAD DWIVEDI Vs CHAKRADHAR AND OTHERS)


                      Jabalpur, Dated : 04-12-2021
                            Shri O.P. Dwivedi, Advocate for the petitioner.

                            Shri Anil Dwivedi, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.

Shri A. Rajeshwar Rao, Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.5 & 6/State.

None appeared for the other respondents despite service.

The petitioner, who is a Senior Citizen, has filed the present petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India against his son and grandson. His main grievance is that in the application (Annexure-P/3) filed under the provisions of Sections 21,22 and 23 of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, his prayer before the Competent Authority was for taking appropriate action against the respondents and to provide him adequate protection for his life and property.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Competent Authority misunderstood the prayer and has decided the issue of

maintenance. The same view is taken by the Appellate Authority and instead of granting protection to his life and property, he has dealt with the issue of maintenance. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of this court passed in W.P.No.5217/2019 dated 12.02.2020 (Smt. Amrita Bhatia and others Vs. Baljeet Singh Bhatia and others) and in M.P.No.2679/2020 dated 10.02.2021 (Ganesh and another Vs. Smt. Indue Bai and another).

A bare perusal of the relief clause mentioned in the application Annexure-P/3, it is seen that the petitioner did not pray for any maintenance and he was only asking for protection of his life and property. The order impugned passed by the Competent Authority and the Appellate Authority do not specifically deal with the said issue. Hence, it is apposite to direct the Signature SAN Verified Not Competent Authority to pass specific order in accordance with law with Digitally signed by NITESH PANDEY Date: 2021.12.06 17:24:46 IST 2 MP-3012-2020 regard to the prayer made by the petitioner. The impugned order dated 18.08.2020 (Annex.P/1) passed by the Collector and order dated 17.12.2019 (Annx.P/2) passed by the SDO (Revenue) are hereby set aside.

Accordingly, petition is allowed.

                                                              (PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV)
                                                                         JUDGE

                      Nitesh




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
NITESH PANDEY
Date: 2021.12.06
17:24:46 IST